GHOSTS OF THE PHANTOM SQUAD       

THE 592 GUARDIAN   |   INVESTIGATIVE EDITORIAL


SPECIAL INVESTIGATIVE EDITORIAL

 GHOSTS OF THE                PHANTOM SQUAD           

AK-47s, Venezuelan Gangsters, and a Government That Has Seen This Before


The 592 Guardian  |  Accountability Journalism for the Guyanese Citizen Georgetown, Guyana  ·  June  2026


Thirty-three AK-47 assault rifles. Two separate seizures. In less than a month. One government that has, so far, said almost nothing of substance — and one city businessman with a record that reads less like a dossier and more like a warning that was never heeded. The 592 Guardian submits that what Guyana is witnessing is not an isolated law enforcement story. It is the re-emergence of a structural pathology that this country has paid for before in blood, impunity, and institutional decay. And the current administration’s silence is not merely politically inconvenient. It is, given what history has already documented, an indictment in itself.

On June 5, 2026, a routine-sounding police search in Farm, East Bank Demerara became anything but. Officers acting on intelligence intercepted a vehicle at Schoonard, West Bank Demerara, and found 23 AK-47 rifles and 503 rounds of matching ammunition. A Venezuelan national, Jonathan Gans, was arrested at the scene. Days later, a wanted bulletin was issued for city businessman Randy Jagdeo and one Orlando Gabriel. Jagdeo — now 40 years old — surrendered to the Criminal Investigation Department on Sunday, accompanied by his attorney. He remained in custody as of press time.

This was the second such seizure in less than  a month. In late May, ten AK-47-style rifles were intercepted in Berbice. Three Guyanese nationals are currently before the courts in connection with that matter. The serial numbers on most of the June cache had been obliterated. Deputy Police Commissioner Wendell Blanhum confirmed the weapons were manufactured in the United States.

Thirty-three military-grade rifles in sixty days. The GPF has no comment of substance. The Minister of Home Affairs says she is ‘still assessing.’ Guyanese have heard this cadence before.

When Demerara Waves asked Minister of Home Affairs Oneidge Walrond about the apparent motive behind two major arms seizures in rapid succession, she responded: “Still assessing. The investigation is active.” Her advisor, former minister Robeson Benn, offered only: “Guyanese always have to be concerned when guns are being pushed around.” That was it. From a government managing a country with one of the most valuable oil discoveries in the Western Hemisphere, two cabinet-level figures could not produce a single sentence about what 33 assault rifles are doing circulating through Guyanese wharves.

I.WHO IS RANDY JAGDEO — AND WHY DOES HIS RECORD MATTER

The AFC press release framing this story as a PPP protection scandal deserves scrutiny before it deserves amplification. Randy Jagdeo is not a PPP loyalist. His recent history suggests precisely the opposite political alignment — which makes the story considerably more complex and considerably more alarming than opposition talking points allow.

In May 2025, Jagdeo was charged with inciting treason following a Facebook post in which he declared that Essequibo belongs to Venezuela — a statement made, notably, while displaying signage at his ‘Thousand Dollar Store’ on the East Bank of Demerara that featured Guyana’s map with the Essequibo region excised. The charge carried the possibility of life imprisonment. In January 2026, the Diamond Magistrate’s Court threw the case out entirely, with Magistrate Dylon Bess upholding a no-case submission, finding the charge legally flawed and unsupported by sufficient evidence.

Tren De Aragua

Step back and read that sequence again. A Guyanese businessman publicly expressed sympathy for Venezuela’s territorial claims over Essequibo. His treason charge collapsed in court. Months later, he surfaces in connection with 23 AK-47s being transported by Venezuelan nationals. One of those nationals — Jonathan Gans — was arrested at the scene. Security officials, speaking on background to Demerara Waves, said they believe the weapons were destined for mining sector gangs or border networks, and that Tren de Aragua — the Venezuelan criminal organization with transnational reach — may be extending its footprint westward into Guyana.

A man who publicly sided with Venezuela on Essequibo. A treason charge that dissolved. Then Venezuelan nationals and 23 AK-47s. The 592 Guardian does not assert guilt. We assert that these facts demand answers no one in authority is providing.

The 592 Guardian does not assert that Randy Jagdeo is guilty of anything beyond what has been proven. What we do assert is this: the convergence of a pro-Venezuela public posture, a collapsed treason prosecution, and a subsequent arms trafficking investigation involving Venezuelan co-accused is not a coincidence that a responsible government can afford to treat with ‘still assessing.’ It is a national security threat that demands transparent, publicly communicated investigation — and it is receiving neither.

II.THE GHOST IN THE ROOM: ROGER KHAN AND THE PHANTOM SQUAD

The AFC’s invocation of Roger Khan is not mere electioneering. It is a reference to a chapter of Guyanese governance that was proven, prosecuted in a United States federal court, and never domestically reckoned with. For any reader unfamiliar with that chapter, The 592 Guardian submits the following record — not as historical color, but as living institutional precedent.

Between 2002 and 2006, Guyana was in the grip of a crime wave triggered by the escape of five prisoners from Camp Street Prison on February 23, 2002. Criminal gangs, most notoriously that of Rondell ‘Fineman’ Rawlins, conducted robberies, murders, and massacres. The Guyana Police Force was outmatched. Into that vacuum stepped Shaheed ‘Roger’ Khan — an Indo-Guyanese cocaine trafficker with construction and forestry businesses as cover, Colombian supply lines, and connections that reached into the highest offices of the People’s Progressive Party government led by President Bharrat Jagdeo.

What Khan ran was not a private security firm. It was an extrajudicial killing unit — the Phantom Squad — staffed largely by former police officers, armed with military-grade weapons, and operating with what prosecutors and WikiLeaks cables later established was de facto state protection. The squad’s primary targets were Afro-Guyanese criminal figures. The ethnic geometry of that targeting was not incidental. It was the entire point.

Khan later advertised in local newspapers — in his own name — that he had been fighting crime on behalf of the Bharrat Jagdeo-led government. The government denied it. The US federal court record told a different story.

The evidentiary record is not circumstantial. In December 2002, Khan and associates were intercepted by a Guyana Defense Force patrol driving an armored vehicle. Inside: military arms, and a Cellular Protocol Analyzer — a Smith Myers CSM 7806, sophisticated telephone interception equipment that is sold only with government authorization. The GDF detained them. They were released hours later on direct orders from Presidential Secretariat Head Roger Luncheon, who directed the return of all equipment.

In US federal court proceedings, Smith Myers co-director testimony confirmed the cellular intercept equipment used by Khan’s network had been sold to the Government of Guyana. Court exhibits showed the purchase was received on behalf of the government by then Health Minister Dr. Leslie Ramsammy. An independent contractor subsequently traveled to Guyana to train Khan and his associates in the equipment’s use. Dr. Ramsammy denied any knowledge of Khan or the surveillance device. The exhibits bearing his signature were entered into the court record regardless.

Among those killed as a direct result of communications intercepted using that equipment: Ronald Waddell, a popular Afro-Guyanese political talk show host, shot outside his East Bank Demerara home on January 30, 2006. And Donald Allison, youth organizer and boxing coach. A former Phantom Squad member turned DEA and FBI informant, Selwyn Vaughn, testified under oath to the operational details of Waddell’s execution — the surveillance, the call to Khan, the four former police officers who arrived in a burgundy Toyota AT 192 armed with automatic weapons.

A WikiLeaks cable from the US Embassy in Georgetown, later made public, is unambiguous: it states that Home Affairs Minister Ronald Gajraj orchestrated Guyana’s death squads in 2002-03, certainly in close collaboration with Khan,’ and that Luncheon ‘intervened and ordered the authorities to release Khan and return his equipment.’ The cable also notes that PPP government leaders ‘were comfortable with Khan because they thought he was on their side,’ and expressed anxiety about the prospect of a criminal kingpin aligned with the political opposition.

The PPP was not merely tolerant of a drug lord. According to a US Embassy cable, a US federal court record, and Khan’s own public statements, it was his client. The question in 2026 is whether the institutional appetite for that arrangement was ever truly extinguished.

What happened to the principals? Gajraj resigned under international pressure and was appointed High Commissioner to India — a soft landing that became a template. A presidential commission of inquiry, chaired by then Acting Chief Justice Ian Chang, found ‘no credible evidence’ of Gajraj’s involvement in extrajudicial killings. The inquiry’s conclusions were contested by virtually every independent observer and contradicted by the US Embassy’s own assessment. Gajraj served in India until the government changed in 2015.

Roger Khan himself fled to Suriname in June 2006 as police closed in. Then-Justice Minister Chan Santokhi — now Suriname’s President — declared him a threat to national security. Khan was eventually extradited to the United States. He was convicted of narcotics trafficking, arms smuggling, money laundering, and witness tampering. He was sentenced to fifteen years. He returned to Guyana in September 2019 after serving approximately ten years. He was questioned about the murders of Ronald Waddell and Donald Allison. He was released on station bail days later. The charges were dropped. No evidence, it was said.

Roger Khan, as of the date of this editorial, is a free man in Guyana. The 592 Guardian formally asks: has he been questioned in connection with, or eliminated from, the current investigation into 33 AK-47 rifles moving through Guyanese wharves?

III. THE VENEZUELAN VECTOR: TREN DE ARAGUA AND GUYANA’S EXPOSED FLANK

The Roger Khan framing, while historically essential, must not be allowed to obscure the distinct and equally alarming security dimension of this crisis: the Venezuelan criminal penetration of Guyanese territory. These may be related phenomena — or they may be parallel tracks that intersect at the point of arms supply. Either possibility is grave.

Tren de Aragua is not a street gang. It is a transnational criminal organiZation that originated in the Tocoron Prison in Aragua state, Venezuela, and has since expanded across at least a dozen countries in Latin America and the Caribbean. Its documented activities include arms trafficking, narcotics distribution, human trafficking, contract killing, and — increasingly — the provision of coercive services to state and non-state actors in territories where Venezuelan influence is being projected. Security analysts have documented its relationship with elements of the Maduro government as instrumentally symbiotic: the organization operates freely where it serves state interests and is contained where it does not.

Against that backdrop, the presence of Venezuelan nationals as primary movers in both the May Berbice seizure and the June Schoonard seizure is not a footnote. It is the story. Background sources cited by Demerara Waves believe the weapons were destined for mining sector networks or border gangs — and express the view that Tren de Aragua is actively expanding westward into Guyana. This aligns with the documented pattern of incidents along the Cuyuni River, where a GDF patrol boat was fired upon by unidentified gunmen as recently as May 29, 2026, injuring a soldier — the second such incident that month.

A GDF patrol boat fired upon on the Cuyuni. Venezuelan nationals moving AK-47s through Georgetown wharves. A businessman with public pro-Venezuela sympathies in police custody. This is not a crime story. It is a sovereignty story.

The ICJ proceedings on the Essequibo matter have not resolved the underlying pressure Venezuela applies through non-military means. Caracas has long understood that coercive presence in disputed territory — through mining networks, criminal infrastructure, and allied local facilitators — is a tool of territorial politics that costs far less than conventional military action and produces deniability that ICJ proceedings cannot easily pierce. The question The 592 Guardian raises is this: are the weapons now circulating in Guyana part of a criminal supply chain, a political intimidation infrastructure, or both? Because the answer to that question determines whether this is a GPF matter or a matter of national defense.

The GPF, to state the obvious, is not equipped to answer that question on its own. Its capacity limitations are institutional and resource-driven — not a criticism of individual officers but a structural reality. What is required is a joint intelligence assessment involving the GDF, the GPF’s organized crime unit, the DEA (which has maintained a Georgetown office since 2017), and CARICOM’s regional security architecture, to the extent that architecture can be activated. None of that has been publicly announced. The government has said it is ‘still assessing.’

IV.THE SILENCE DOCTRINE: WHAT INSTITUTIONAL NON-RESPONSE REVEALS

The AFC is wrong to frame this primarily as a PPP-protection story about Randy Jagdeo, because Jagdeo’s own public record does not support the claim that he is a PPP asset being shielded. But the AFC is entirely right to identify the government’s silence as a scandal in its own right — and the Roger Khan precedent is precisely why that silence cannot be given the benefit of the doubt.

The operating manual of PPP crisis management, as established across two decades of governance, follows a predictable sequence: initial silence, followed by minimal acknowledgment, followed by institutional process (inquiry, investigation, review) that produces findings convenient to the government, followed by the quiet resolution of the matter through reassignment, soft exile, or legal collapse. Ronald Gajraj went to India. Roger Khan’s murder charges evaporated. The Camp Street massacre inquiries produced no convictions of political significance. The pattern is not conspiracy theory. It is documented institutional history.

The silence of the Ali-Jagdeo government on 33 AK-47s is not uncertainty. It is a posture. And that posture has a name: it is called impunity management.

 

The specific questions that silence must be made to answer are these.

First: how did rifles — US-manufactured, with obliterated serial numbers — pass through Guyanese port infrastructure in not one but two transactions within sixty days? Wharves are regulated. Customs is a state function. Someone either missed this or facilitated it. The government owes the public a customs and port-of-entry audit, publicly disclosed.

Second: what is the status of Randy Jagdeo’s prior case — the treason matter — in relation to this investigation? The collapse of that prosecution deserves re-examination in light of his current circumstances. The 592 Guardian does not suggest the earlier charge was validly framed — the magistrate’s ruling suggests otherwise. But the pattern of a man with documented pro-Venezuela public positions being in proximity to a Venezuelan-linked arms network is a pattern that prosecutorial authorities have an obligation to examine in its totality, not in isolated case files.

Third: what is the current status of Roger Khan in Guyana, and has he been interviewed as part of any intelligence assessment related to the current arms proliferation? The 592 Guardian acknowledges this question may seem like a reach to some readers. We submit that given Khan’s documented history of arms procurement, his established criminal networks, and the fact that he has been a free man in this country for seven years with no accountability for any of the acts he admitted to, the question is not a reach. It is due diligence.

V.WHAT ACCOUNTABILITY DEMANDS

The 592 Guardian does not traffic in conspiracy. We traffic in documented pattern, institutional precedent, and the editorial obligation to ask what powerful entities prefer not to answer. On the basis of what has been established — in US federal courts, in WikiLeaks cables, in the public record of the Phantom Squad era, and in the current facts of two arms seizures and a government that cannot find its voice — we make the following editorial demands.

The Ministry of Home Affairs must provide a public briefing — not a press statement — on the results of its ‘assessment,’ including a timeline of both seizures, the known movement of the weapons through Guyanese territory, and the status of all persons in custody. ‘Active investigation’ cannot be a shield against public accountability on matters of this gravity.

The Guyana Revenue Authority and the Customs Anti-Narcotic Unit must commission and publish an audit of port-of-entry controls that speaks directly to how military-grade weapons are entering Guyana undetected. If that audit reveals systemic failure, the responsible officials must be identified. If it reveals facilitation, those individuals must be prosecuted.

The National Assembly must hold an emergency session on national security. The Speaker — whose own record of institutional responsiveness The 592 Guardian has previously documented — must convene that session within fourteen days. Parliamentary oversight of the security apparatus is not optional in a constitutional democracy.

And the government must answer, publicly and on the record, whether any domestic intelligence assessment has been made of Tren de Aragua’s presence in Guyana — and if so, what its findings are and what response has been authorized.

THE ROT IN THE PLOT

Guyana has been here before. A crime wave it could not contain. A state that found it more convenient to outsource violence than to build institutions. A drug lord with an armored vehicle, military weapons, and government-restricted surveillance equipment — released the same day he was detained, by order of the Presidential Secretariat.

That chapter did not end cleanly. It ended with unmarked graves, with a talk show host shot in his driveway, with a boxing coach killed on intelligence gathered by equipment the Health Minister signed for, and with a drug lord who served ten years in an American prison and returned to Guyana to face — nothing.

We do not know, as of this writing, whether Randy Jagdeo is a criminal, a facilitator, a dupe, or a man in the wrong place at the wrong time. The courts will determine that. What we do know is that 33 military-grade rifles have entered this country in sixty days, that Venezuelan nationals are the primary movers, that a man with documented pro-Venezuela public sympathies is in custody, that the border is being probed with live fire, and that the government’s response to all of it is silence dressed up as process.

The light is in. The rot is visible. What remains to be seen is whether any institution in this country has the will to act on what it illuminates — or whether Guyana will wait, as it has before, for an American federal court to tell us what happened in our own wharves.

The 592 Guardian is an independent accountability journalism outlet covering Guyanese governance, public finance, and regional geopolitics.

Editorial correspondence: editor@the592guardian.com

 

The Heist of Precision Woodworking

THE 592 GUARDIAN

ACCOUNTABILITY JOURNALISM  •  INDEPENDENT  •  GUYANESE


 INVESTIGATIVE REPORT

The Heist of Precision Woodworking

How Republic Bank, a rogue receiver and a complicit auditor, stripped Guyana’s most decorated manufacturer of its life’s work — and how the judiciary and regulator let them get away with it.

Reported by The 592 Guardian  |  Investigative Desk     Georgetown, Guyana  •  June 2026

I.THE COMPANY THEY BUILT

In 1983, five Guyanese from Georgetown made a bet against the odds. Howard ,Ronald and Rustum Bulkan along with Gordon Forte and Hakim Rahaman founded Precision Woodworking Limited at the Ruimveldt Industrial Estate — a manufacturing enterprise in a country not known for manufacturing ambition — with a clear and singular vision: to prove that Guyana’s extraordinary tropical hardwoods could become the foundation of a world-class, value-added export industry.

They were right. Over the next two decades, Precision grew into one of the most admired companies in the Caribbean. It manufactured and exported high-quality furniture crafted from indigenous Guyanese hardwoods to the European market, earning a reputation for precision engineering, sustainability and design. The company became a landmark at Ruimveldt, employing scores of Guyanese workers and showcasing what disciplined, innovative entrepreneurship could look like in a post-colonial economy.

The company was awarded the Ernst & Young Caribbean Entrepreneur of the Year title in 2001 — to date, the only Guyanese company to earn that distinction. The following year, Ronald Bulkan was inducted into the World Entrepreneur of the Year Academy in Monte Carlo.

 By any measure, Precision Woodworking was a national asset — proof of concept for a manufacturing sector that Guyana’s oil-fixated policy class has never adequately nurtured. Before the first barrel of oil was pumped offshore, Precision demonstrated that Guyana could build, export and compete internationally

In Ruimveldt, they produced fully-manufactured, high value-added products made entirely from local timbers, utilizing an all-local workforce, and sold to the most discerning international markets. A feat that defied not only conventional wisdom but unconventional wisdom.

The company had, over its lending history with Republic Bank (Guyana) Limited, repaid principal in excess of $513 million and paid more than $327 million in interest. It was, in the bank’s own institutional memory, considered an excellent customer. None of that would save it from what was coming.

IITHE CRISIS, THE OFFER AND THE BROKEN PROMISE

By 2010, the global economic contraction had caught up with Precision Woodworking. Export markets softened, operational costs mounted, and the company found itself unable to service its debt to Republic Bank.  The company acknowledged the difficulty plainly — writing to the bank in May 2011 to discuss the winding up of affairs and disposal of assets. It was the kind of letter that takes courage to write, and that any reputable bank should receive with a duty of good faith.

What followed instead was a sequence of events that the Bulkans allege was not remediation but orchestrated predation.

In the weeks preceding and following that letter, the company identified not one but two viable buyers for its prime industrial real estate. Neal & Massy offered to purchase Lot 35 at Ruimveldt. A firm agreement of sale (AOS) was executed with Torginol Paints for Lots 32 and E½,21 valued at $230 million, complete with a $30 million deposit — a cheque handed directly to Republic Bank’s Managing Director, John Alves, at a meeting on June 30, 2011.

At that same meeting, according to sworn witness testimony by the Bulkans, Mr. Alves made a three-part commitment: first, to reschedule the company’s remaining debt into a term loan following application of the Torginol proceeds; second, to apply a special concessionary interest rate during a moratorium on capital repayments; and third, to recommend to the Bank’s Board a request for partial debt forgiveness, contingent on a formal business plan.

Both property sales together would have substantially liquidated Precision’s entire indebtedness to Republic Bank — and left the company with manufacturing equipment valued at nearly USD 1 million. The bank refused repayment anyway.

The company submitted its Business Plan, as requested, under cover letter dated August 2, 2011. The Bank’s reply, dated August 9, 2011, bore no relationship to what had been agreed. It claimed the injection of equity had always been a prerequisite to any favorable consideration — a condition that had never been raised at the June 30th meeting, and one that none of the Bank’s employees present that day ever appeared in court to defend or corroborate. The sole bank witness produced at trial was an employee flown in from Trinidad, who the Bulkans allege committed perjury.

III. THE $82 MILLION PHANTOM DEPOSIT

At the center of this affair is a financial transaction that has never been satisfactorily explained, and whose implications the Bank of Guyana appears to have deliberately avoided confronting.

On June 16, 2011 — two weeks before the June 30th meeting at which Republic Bank’s MD accepted the Torginol deposit and made his commitments — a sum of $82,068,617.00 was deposited into Precision Woodworking’s account at Republic Bank  without any prior knowledge of the Principals. The depositor, according to the Bulkans, was Shamnarine Narine of Guytrac, a company with no commercial relationship with Precision Woodworking.

The Bulkans allege this was not a commercial transaction but a regulatory manoeuvre. Under Bank of Guyana guidelines, delinquent loan accounts must be reported to the central bank at end-June each year. Precision’s unsecured exposure at the time — the difference between its total indebtedness and the book value of its collateral — was precisely $82,068,616.00. To the dollar, this deposit covered that exposure, preventing the account from being classified as non-performing and reported to the regulator.

The deposit was not a payment. It was a mask — designed to conceal a non-performing account from regulatory scrutiny while the bank’s principals arranged what the Bulkans believe was a pre-determined disposal of the company’s assets.

Republic Bank’s defence, when challenged, was that the deposit was an internal credit pursuant to Bank of Guyana provisioning guidelines — standard procedure for a non-performing loan. The Bulkans contest this characterization absolutely, noting that the deposit was made by a named third party (Shamnarine Narine of Guytrac), that it appeared in account records as an external deposit, and that the bank’s subsequent refusal to provide computerized account statements suggests a deliberate effort to conceal the transaction’s true nature.

In December 2019, the Bulkans filed a $90 million lawsuit against the Bank of Guyana and its Governor, Dr. Gobind Ganga, for failing to investigate what they described as an unauthorized, suspicious and unlawful deposit. The case was dismissed in September 2020 on technical procedural grounds — the action should have been brought in the company’s name rather than by the shareholders personally. The central allegation of regulatory negligence was never examined on its merits. The Bank of Guyana’s posture, expressed in a 2014 letter from Governor Ganga, was simply that the matter was before the courts and the bank would be guided accordingly. A regulator that supervises the integrity of Guyana’s banking system abdicated that duty entirely.

IV.THE RECEIVER — ABOVE THE LAW FOR FIFTEEN YEARS

On or around July 2011, Republic Bank appointed Kashir Khan — an attorney-at-law and accountant — as Receiver of Precision Woodworking Limited. The Bulkans allege this appointment was itself unlawful, made after verbal commitments to restructure the debt and after a signed agreement of sale had already been handed to the bank’s MD.

What followed Khan’s appointment is, on the documented record, a saga of institutional impunity without precedent in Guyanese commercial history.

First, Khan allegedly moved to scuttle the Torginol sale — superseding the signed agreement of sale with one of his own preparation, before ultimately allowing that transaction to collapse. Second, he reportedly refused Neal & Massy’s written offer for Lot 35 — a refusal he was examined on during trial testimony. Together, those two transactions would have liquidated Precision’s entire debt to Republic Bank. Khan blocked both.

Third, and most damning: Kashir Khan has, for more than fifteen years, refused to file accounts with the Registrar as required by law, and refused to provide the directors of Precision Woodworking with any accounts of his receivership administration — despite repeated written requests from the Bulkans’ attorneys and a personal visit to his office by the directors themselves.

A receiver who will not account for his administration is not administering a company. He is occupying it. The refusal to file accounts is not a technicality — it is a direct violation of the statutory framework governing receiverships in Guyana.

This is not a minor procedural lapse. Under Guyana’s Companies Act and the Financial Institutions Act, a receiver has mandatory obligations to file accounts and to provide accounting access to the company’s directors. Kashir Khan has defied those obligations for a decade and a half — without reprimand from the court, without action from the Bar Association, and without response from the Bank of Guyana, which continues to permit Republic Bank to maintain him in place.

Republic Bank’s defense for keeping Khan installed, even after the dismissal of the Bulkans’ primary claim in 2021, is that Precision still owes the bank money. That may be so. But the bank refuses — despite repeated, documented requests — to provide statements of account to demonstrate what that debt actually is. A bank that claims you owe it money, but will not show you the accounting, is not recovering a debt. It is sustaining a fiction.

V. NINE YEARS IN A SPECIALIST COURT — AND AN ILLEGAL RULING

In May 2012, the Bulkans filed their legal action — Action No. 298 C/D 2012 — against Kashir Khan and Republic Bank (Guyana) Limited. The case was heard before Guyana’s Commercial Court, a specialist tribunal established at the direct lobbying of commercial banks who complained the regular courts were too slow for commercial disputes.

The irony is almost too painful to record. The case that gave the commercial banking sector its specialist court became, in the hands of that same sector, a study in procedural obstruction. Khan took four years to file a witness statement after being ordered to do so by the court — without reprimand and without penalty. Interlocutory applications, Full Court appeals and procedural manoeuvres by counsel for the defendants extended the matter year after year.

A judgment was finally delivered on February 15, 2021 — nearly nine years after filing. But the Bulkans and their legal team allege the ruling was itself illegal. The decision, they argue, addressed only sub-paragraphs (B), (F) and (N) of their Statement of Claim — the very sub-paragraphs that had been struck by a prior Full Court ruling. The court ruled, in effect, on claims it had previously struck from the record, while ignoring the surviving claims entirely.

A decision that adjudicates claims already struck by a higher court is not a judgment. It is a nullity — and one that raises grave questions about the integrity of the proceedings.

In March 2022, the Bulkans filed a Motion at the Court of Appeal seeking an expedited hearing of their appeal against Justice Singh’s decision. It was uncontested by Republic Bank and Khan. As of the most recent public reporting in March 2026 — fourteen years after the original action was filed — the appeal has still not been heard on its merits. Ronald Bulkan, writing in Stabroek News in March 2026, expressed the hope that the matter would ‘sooner rather than later receive attention.’

Between January 2017 and January 2024, at least 14 articles and letters were published in the Guyanese press on this matter. Republic Bank, the judiciary, the Bank of Guyana and key public officials have remained silent throughout.

VI.RAM & MCRAE — THE AUDITOR’S SILENCE

No exposé of this affair is complete without confronting the role of Ram & McRae, Chartered Accountants — the external auditors of Republic Bank (Guyana) Limited.

Ram & McRae, the firm co-founded by Christopher Ram, has served as auditor to Republic Bank for decades. Annual reports from 2015, 2017 and 2022 — all publicly available — list Ram & McRae as the Bank’s appointed auditors, with the AGM passing resolutions at each annual meeting to reappoint and remunerate them. The relationship between the auditor and the bank is not incidental; it is structural, remunerative and ongoing.

As external auditor, Ram & McRae is required to certify the accounts of Republic Bank and provide an Independent Auditor’s Report at the end of each financial year. Those accounts, certified year after year, contain no disclosure, no qualification and no note concerning the unresolved controversy surrounding the $82 million deposit into Precision Woodworking’s account — an account held on Republic Bank’s books, under a receivership that the Bank controls, and which has never been subject to independent accounting review.

An auditor who certifies a bank’s accounts without qualifying or disclosing a material unresolved liability — a receivership that has filed no accounts in fifteen years, held by a bank that refuses to provide account statements to the company it claims to be owed by — is not auditing. They are covering.

Christopher Ram is a prominent public commentator in Guyana, with a blog and a reputation as a voice on governance and financial integrity. That public persona exists in direct tension with a professional relationship that, the Bulkans allege, has provided material cover for Republic Bank’s conduct. Ram’s public silence on this specific matter — which has been extensively documented in the press — is not a neutral absence. It is itself a statement.

Notably, in March 2026, the Caribbean Court of Justice delivered its judgment in Cara Investments Limited v Christopher Ram and Bank of Nova Scotia — a case in which Ram served as court-appointed Receiver-Manager of Hotel Tower Ltd. The CCJ, in that judgment, articulated an evolving principle that good faith is a foundational organizing principle in contract law, requiring parties to act honestly, reasonably and fairly, and not capriciously or arbitrarily. The CCJ’s language is directly applicable to the conduct alleged against Republic Bank and its receiver in the Precision Woodworking matter — conduct that, if the Bulkans’ account is accurate, represents the antithesis of good faith at every turn.

VII. THE POLITICAL DIMENSION

Ronald Bulkan is not simply an aggrieved businessman. He is a former Minister of Communities in the APNU+AFC coalition government that held office from 2015 to 2020. He was an APNU parliamentarian, an APNU candidate in the 2020 general elections, and a vocal critic of the PPP/C during the years of opposition. He entered politics not out of opportunism, but from a stated commitment — documented in a 2012 interview with Stabroek News — to the kind of institutional reform that would break Guyana’s cycles of ethnic patronage and political retribution.

It is important to note the timing. The events that precipitated Precision’s destruction — the receiver appointment, the scuttled sales, the phantom deposit — occurred in 2011, during the final years of the PPP/C’s near-uninterrupted two-decade hold on government. The Bulkans allege that bank officials at the highest level saw in the company’s financial difficulties an opportunity for personal enrichment through a pre-arranged disposal of prime industrial real estate at Ruimveldt — properties that had significant commercial value — to connected parties.

Their suspicion, stated explicitly in the dossier, is that the properties were targeted for disposal to Guytrac — the same firm whose principal allegedly made the $82 million phantom deposit. H. Sugrim, identified in trial testimony as the owner of an establishment adjacent to Precision’s Lot 35, made a purchase offer for that property that was also refused by the receiver. The identity of the eventual buyers of Precision’s properties — and the prices at which those assets were sold — remain, to this day, a matter of public record that neither the receiver nor the bank will disclose.

The Bulkans allege that no Guyanese staff of the bank would have benefitted from the scheme — and that the local staff’s refusal to testify in support of the bank’s case during trial is itself a form of institutional conscience.

Since the PPP/C’s return to power in 2020, the state’s institutional apparatus — including the Bank of Guyana, the judiciary’s Commercial Court division, and the public prosecutorial machinery — has done nothing to address what is, on the documented record, an unresolved scandal involving an unlawful receivership, an unaccounted asset disposal, a suspicious deposit, and a certified-public-accountant-turned-receiver who has defied his legal obligations for fifteen years without consequence.

Whether the failure to act reflects institutional inertia or deliberate political calculation is a question this newspaper cannot answer definitively. What we can say is this: in a country where the ruling party governs with a demonstrated appetite for using institutional levers against its political adversaries, the continued impunity of those who stripped a former APNU minister of his life’s work does not look like an accident.

VIII. THE HUMAN COST

Precision Woodworking was not just a company. It was the livelihood of scores of Guyanese workers. A Kaieteur News report from 2022 documented that former Precision workers were still owed in excess of $30 million in unpaid salaries and termination benefits — more than a year after the dismissal of the Bulkans’ primary legal action, and with the receiver still installed and still refusing to provide any accounting.

The brothers themselves, having issued personal guarantees to Republic Bank, find themselves unable to restart any commercial enterprise — because in the absence of a final accounting of what the receivership owed or discharged, they cannot establish their own financial standing. A receiver who refuses to account does not merely harm a company. He poisons the financial futures of every individual attached to it.

 

Precision Woodworking had been, in its prime, proof of what Guyana’s non-oil productive sector could achieve. It had won the region’s most prestigious entrepreneurial honor. It had attracted international investment, exported Guyanese manufacturing excellence to Europe, and demonstrated the viability of sustainable value-added processing in the timber sector. That enterprise is gone — not because it failed on its merits, but because the institutional framework that should have protected it was turned against it instead.

IX. WHAT MUST HAPPEN NOW

The 592 Guardian calls for the following:

  1. The Court of Appeal must hear and determine the Bulkans’ appeal without further delay. Fourteen years is not a judicial process. It is a denial of justice dressed in procedural garb.
  2. The Bank of Guyana must exercise its supervisory authority under the Financial Institutions Act and investigate the circumstances of the June 2011 deposit, the administration of the Precision Woodworking receivership, and Kashir Khan’s failure to file accounts with the Registrar. Regulatory silence is regulatory complicity.
  3. The Institute of Chartered Accountants of Guyana (ICAG) must examine the conduct of Ram & McRae as auditors to Republic Bank in the context of their statutory obligations and the unresolved controversy documented in this report.
  4. Republic Bank (Guyana) Limited must provide full account statements to the directors of Precision Woodworking from the date of the receiver’s appointment to the present. A bank that will not show its accounting to the party it claims to be owed cannot claim to be acting within the law.
  5. Kashir Khan must immediately file all outstanding receivership accounts with the Registrar and provide the directors of Precision Woodworking with a full accounting of his administration. Failure to do so should result in professional sanction, civil contempt proceedings, and referral to the Director of Public Prosecutions.

CONCLUSION

In Guyana’s current moment of oil-driven exuberance, it is easy to look past the small-scale institutional corruptions that have always characterized the relationship between capital, the state and the courts. Easy — but inexcusable.

The story of Precision Woodworking is not ancient history. It is ongoing. As Republic Bank celebrates record profits of $7.26 billion for its 2024 financial year — a 47.9 percent increase — the men who built one of the country’s finest manufacturing enterprises remain unable to account for what was taken from them, unable to restart, and without recourse in a court system that has consumed fourteen years of their lives.

Ronald Bulkan entered politics because he believed that the nature of a society is determined by its leaders. He believed Guyana could be better. The institutional apparatus that stripped him and others of Precision Woodworking, and has since refused to provide any accounting of what was done with it, is a precise measure of how much further Guyana still has to go.

The heist of Precision Woodworking is not a dispute between a bank and a defaulting borrower. It is a case study in how Guyana’s institutional infrastructure — banking, regulatory, judicial and professional — can be assembled into an instrument of dispossession when the political conditions are right.

The 592 Guardian will continue to report on this matter until there is a full accounting.

 

KEY FACTS AT A GLANCE

Company founded:  1983, by  Howard ,Ronald, Rustum Bulkan, Gordon Forte and Hakim Rahaman

Peak recognition:  Ernst & Young Caribbean Entrepreneur of the Year, 2001 — the only Guyanese company to hold this honour

World Academy induction:  Ronald Bulkan, World Entrepreneur of the Year Academy, Monaco, 2002

Total debt repaid (principal):  Over $513 million

Total interest paid:  Over $327 million

Disputed deposit:  $82,068,617 — deposited June 16, 2011 by Shamnarine Narine (Guytrac)

Receiver appointed:  Kashir Khan, attorney-at-law and accountant — July 2011

Legal action filed:  May 15, 2012 — Action No. 298 C/D 2012

Commercial Court judgment:  February 15, 2021 — alleged by plaintiffs to be illegal

Court of Appeal motion:  Filed March 7, 2022 — uncontested — still pending as of 2026

Receivership accounts filed:  None — after 15+ years

Workers’ unpaid benefits:  Over $30 million outstanding

RBGL 2024 after-tax profit:  $7.26 billion — a 47.9% increase

External auditor to RBGL:  Ram & McRae, Chartered Accountants (reappointed annually)

CCJ good faith precedent:  Cara Investments v Christopher Ram & Bank of Nova Scotia, March 2026

THE 592 GUARDIAN  ♦ ACCOUNTABILITY JOURNALISM  ♦  INDEPENDENT ♦ GUYANESE

 

THE 24.8 MILLION QUESTION

THE 592 GUARDIAN   •   INVESTIGATIVE EDITORIAL

PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY SERIES

THE 24.8 MILLION QUESTION:

State-of-the-Art Rhetoric, Standard Passenger-Boat Reality


A detailed procurement query into the Ministry of Health’s water ambulance acquisition for Region 7 (Cuyuni-Mazaruni)

By: Hem Kumar

There is a particular kind of insult embedded in bureaucratic language—one that is the more offensive for being dressed in the vocabulary of good intentions. When the Ministry of Health of the Cooperative Republic of Guyana recently announced the handover of a new “water ambulance” to the Regional Democratic Council of Region 7 (Cuyuni-Mazaruni), the press release read like a triumph of modern governance. Words such as “state-of-the-art,” “highly connected regional network,” and “synchronous telemedicine” were deployed with the smooth confidence of officials who do not expect to be asked follow-up questions.

The public was not shown a technical specification sheet, a bill of quantities, or an independent surveyor’s assessment. The public was shown a photograph. And that photograph—circulated under the official banner of the Ministry itself—tells a story that is in direct, irreconcilable conflict with the text that accompanied it.

The sum involved is 24,883,154 Guyanese dollars. At the prevailing exchange rate of approximately 208 GYD to one United States dollar, that figure converts to USD 119,630—a figure that, rounded for public discussion, stands at one hundred and twenty thousand United States dollars. This is not a rounding error. This is not a procurement of modest ambition. This is an expenditure that, at international maritime commercial rates, should purchase a purpose-engineered emergency medical vessel equipped with professional-grade systems. What appears to have been delivered, based on the official photographic record, is something substantially less than that.

This editorial is not an attack on the aspiration. The residents of Region 7—scattered across one of Guyana’s most geographically challenging and medically underserved territories, navigating the treacherous rapids and volatile currents of the Middle and Lower Mazaruni River—deserve emergency medical transport of the highest standard. This editorial is a demand, made on their behalf and on behalf of every Guyanese taxpayer, for answers to questions that the official press release conspicuously failed to address.

I. THE VESSEL IN THE PHOTOGRAPH: WHAT THE OFFICIAL IMAGE REVEALS

The first and most fundamental tool of public accountability is the ability to compare an official claim against observable physical evidence. In this case, the Ministry itself has provided that evidence in the form of the handover photograph.

What does a genuine, purpose-built water ambulance look like at the USD 00,000–50,000 price point in international markets? It features a reinforced, high-freeboard hull specifically engineered for rough-water conditions; a wide transom or bow-loading door for horizontal stretcher access; enclosed, climate-regulated patient bay with minimum standing headroom of 6 feet for medical personnel; twin-engine propulsion for operational redundancy in emergencies; marine-grade satellite communications hardware; dedicated power inverters for medical equipment; and clearly delineated medical cross markings and emergency lighting arrays.

What does the official photograph reveal? A standard, low-clearance enclosed river commuter hull—a design template familiar to anyone who has taken a passenger launch on Guyana’s interior waterways—fitted with a single outboard engine, full-length commercial passenger windows, narrow side-entry doors, and what appears to be a standard low-profile roof. The vessel has been furnished with an official Ministry of Health sticker and a paint livery.

It is a legitimate and serviceable river craft. It is not, by any internationally recognized standard, a state-of-the-art water ambulance. And the difference between those two things is not cosmetic—it is the difference that determines whether a critically injured patient lives or dies during a midnight emergency evacuation on the Mazaruni.

II. SEVEN HARD QUESTIONS THE MINISTRY MUST ANSWER

The following questions are not rhetorical. They are the precise technical and financial interrogatories that any responsible parliamentary oversight body, any diligent Auditor General’s office, and any independent procurement review board should be placing before the Ministry of Health as a matter of urgency.

QUESTION 1: Where is the twin-engine redundancy—and who signed off on a single-engine configuration for emergency medical service?

The vessel visible in the official photograph is powered by a single outboard motor. In the conditions of Region 7’s river systems—known for their unpredictable currents, submerged rocks, and the operational reality that emergency calls do not arrive during calm daylight hours—a single engine is not a specification; it is a liability. International maritime safety standards for emergency medical vessels are unambiguous: redundant propulsion is not optional where human life depends on arrival.

If the original procurement tender specified twin-engine propulsion—as any competent specification for an emergency vessel in these waters should have—then the delivery of a single-engine vessel represents a direct failure of contract compliance. If the tender itself specified only a single engine, that failure occurred at the design stage and implicates whoever drafted the technical specifications. Either way, the public is owed a direct answer: what propulsion system was specified, what was delivered, and what was paid for?

QUESTION 2: How does a stretcher physically enter this vessel—and was patient loading ever tested before handover?

Emergency medical transport begins before the engine starts. It begins the moment paramedics attempt to load a patient. A trauma victim—a gunshot wound, a snakebite case going into shock, a woman in obstetric crisis, a child with a broken spine from a mining accident—cannot be bent, tilted, or squeezed through a narrow side door. Medical protocol for spinal and trauma cases mandates horizontal loading on a rigid stretcher.

A purpose-built water ambulance addresses this with a wide transom door at the stern, a bow-loading ramp, or a purpose-designed side hatch with sufficient clearance for a standard medical stretcher—typically 22 to 24 inches wide and 76 inches long. The vessel photographed shows a standard closed stern and conventional narrow side doors consistent with a passenger launch configuration. The Ministry is invited to demonstrate, on camera, with a stretcher and two crew members simulating an emergency load, precisely how this is achieved at 2:00 in the morning on a moving river. Until that demonstration is provided, the public is entitled to conclude that this fundamental operational requirement was never tested.

QUESTION 3: Can a medic stand upright inside this vessel—and if not, how is emergency clinical intervention performed?

The roof profile of the vessel in the photograph is consistent with standard river commuter construction, optimized for passenger capacity and fuel efficiency rather than clinical functionality. The interior headroom appears insufficient to allow a medical professional of average height to stand upright. This is not an aesthetic concern. CPR requires the practitioner to apply vertical, body-weight-assisted chest compressions from a standing position. IV bag administration requires the bag to hang above the patient. Airway management, wound packing, and defibrillation all require a medic who can move freely and with postural stability in a rocking vessel.

What is the interior standing headroom of this vessel at its tallest internal point? What is the specified minimum headroom in the original tender? Were these measurements verified at acceptance and handover? Was a medical officer present during the acceptance inspection to certify clinical operability?

QUESTION 4: What, precisely, does the “telemedicine” component consist of—and what does it cost as a line item?

The Ministry’s press release placed considerable emphasis on the vessel’s telemedicine capability, describing “synchronous” digital links to specialist physicians as a defining feature of this investment. Synchronous telemedicine—live two-way video consultation with a remote specialist—requires, at minimum: a marine-grade satellite internet terminal (such as a Starlink Marine or equivalent unit, retailing at USD 2 ,500– plus subscription @ $250 per month); a dedicated power inverter system rated for marine use; a ruggedized tablet or display with sufficient brightness for clinical use in sunlight; and a secure, encrypted communications platform.

The Ministry must produce the itemized bill of quantities that separates the vessel cost from the telemedicine hardware cost. If telemedicine hardware is not physically installed and operational on this vessel, then the word “telemedicine” in the press release is not a feature description—it is a misrepresentation used to justify a price point that the underlying asset does not support. The public requires a specific answer: what hardware is installed, who supplied it, at what cost, and can it be independently inspected and tested today?

QUESTION 5: Where is the patient privacy—and was medical dignity factored into the design at any stage?

The vessel in the photograph features large, fully transparent commercial glass windows running the length of the passenger cabin—standard construction for a commuter launch where the priority is natural light and passenger comfort. A medical transport vessel is not a commuter launch. A patient being evacuated from a mining injury, a sexual assault, an obstetric emergency, or a mental health crisis has a legal and ethical right to medical privacy. Exposure of vulnerable patients to the full view of bystanders, riverbank communities, and fellow travelers is not a minor operational inconvenience. In many jurisdictions, it constitutes a violation of patient rights.

Did the tender specification include privacy partitioning, opaque window film, or any other patient dignity provision? If so, has it been installed? If not, why was patient privacy omitted from a vessel whose sole stated purpose is medical transport?

QUESTION 6: What is the hull classification, and has it been certified for the specific hydraulic conditions of the Mazaruni River?

The Cuyuni-Mazaruni region is not a benign operating environment. The Mazaruni River is characterized by Class II–IV rapids in several stretches, shifting sandbanks, submerged debris, and seasonal flood conditions that can dramatically alter navigable channels within hours. A standard commuter passenger hull, optimized for calmer interior waterway conditions, is not automatically certified for rough-water emergency operations.

What is the hull’s certified operating classification? What is its rated maximum wave height and current speed tolerance? Was the hull design reviewed by a qualified marine architect for Region 7’s specific river conditions? Was a sea trial—or more precisely, a river trial under simulated emergency load conditions—conducted before the handover ceremony was organized and the press release written?

QUESTION 7: What is the full procurement audit trail—and who authorized the final payment?

Every public procurement in Guyana is governed by the Procurement Act and the regulations of the National Procurement and Tender Administration Board (NPTAB). The public is entitled to know: Was this contract subject to open competitive tendering or was it sole-sourced? If competitive, how many bids were received, and on what technical and financial basis was the winning bid selected? Was the evaluation committee comprised of qualified maritime and medical professionals, or administrative generalists? Was a technical inspection completed by an independent surveyor prior to handover? Who signed the acceptance certificate confirming delivery in conformance with specifications? Who in the Ministry hierarchy authorized final payment, and on what certification basis?

These are not hostile questions. They are the routine, minimum documentation that any transparent, accountable government procurement system generates as a matter of course. If the answers are clean, producing them costs nothing. The reluctance to produce them, should it arise, will itself constitute an answer.

III. THE COMPARATIVE VALUE ARGUMENT: WHAT 120,000 USD SHOULD BUY

To provide context that moves this debate beyond assertion, consider what USD 120,000 commands in the purpose-built emergency water vessel market. At that budget, international maritime suppliers—including regional manufacturers in Trinidad and Tobago, Brazil, and the United States—can deliver vessels including a rigid inflatable boat (RIB) ambulance configuration with twin 150HP outboards, full paramedic bay with 6.5-foot headroom, rear transom door, two-stretcher capacity, and integrated GPS/VHF/AIS systems; an aluminum-hull shallow-draft medical launch purpose-built for river rapids with twin-engine redundancy, privacy-screened patient bay, roof-mounted emergency lighting, and marine Starlink installation; or a purpose-built fiberglass catamaran hull for river ambulance service with increased stability in fast-water crossings, integrated telemedicine suite, and solar supplemental power.

These are not hypothetical luxury items. They are standard, commercially available emergency medical vessel configurations. The question the Ministry of Health cannot escape is this: if these options exist at or near this price point in the international market, why was the procurement process unable to secure any of them? Was the market properly surveyed? Were international suppliers invited to tender? Was the specification written to invite genuine competition, or written around a predetermined supplier and a predetermined product?

IV. THE PATTERN THIS PROCUREMENT FITS

This editorial would be incomplete without acknowledging the wider context in which this procurement must be read. Guyanese civil society and the independent press have, over successive administrations, documented a pattern in which public sector infrastructure procurement—particularly for remote and hinterland communities where oversight is logistically difficult and community voices are least amplified—produces a recurring formula: premium price, bureaucratic fanfare, and sub-standard physical delivery.

Region 7 communities are not in a position to easily inspect or challenge what is delivered to them. Their geographic isolation—the very isolation that makes a proper water ambulance so critical—also makes them among the most vulnerable communities to procurement that prioritizes appearances over function. The Ministry of Health, which has a specific mandate to protect the health and lives of all Guyanese citizens regardless of geography, bears a heightened duty of care toward these communities, not a reduced one.

The framing of a standard river craft as “state-of-the-art” is, in this context, not merely a matter of imprecise language. It is the deployment of sophisticated rhetoric to manage the perceptions of an urban public that will likely never see the vessel—while the rural communities who will depend on it for their lives are left with something materially different from what they were promised and what their taxes paid for.

V. WHAT ACCOUNTABILITY REQUIRES

The 592 Guardian calls on the following institutions to act, without delay:

  • The Auditor General’s Office should initiate an immediate procurement audit of this contract, demanding the original tender documents, technical specification sheets, bid evaluation reports, supplier invoices, acceptance certificates, and all payment authorizations.
  • The Parliamentary Sectoral Committee on Social Services should summon the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Health and the relevant Procurement Officers to provide testimony on the procurement process, the selection criteria, and the acceptance procedure.
  • The National Procurement and Tender Administration Board should review whether the procurement methodology and supplier selection conformed to the letter and spirit of the Procurement Act.
  • The Ministry of Health should, as a gesture of transparency and public confidence, invite an independent maritime surveyor and a registered medical officer to conduct a joint technical inspection of this vessel and publish their findings in full.
  • Civil society organizations and the legal fraternity are invited to consider whether the citizens of Region 7 have a cognizable public interest action arising from the delivery of an asset that may not conform to the specifications for which public funds were expended.

Somewhere in Region 7, tonight and every night, a community health worker is hoping that the next emergency—the mining accident, the difficult birth, the snakebite case—arrives during daylight hours, in calm water, with a stable patient who can be carefully positioned in a narrow side-entry door. They are hoping because hope, at this moment, is what the 24.8 million has left them.

The public is not asking for perfection. The public is asking for honesty—and for a government that understands the difference between a press release and a pulse.

THE 592 GUARDIAN • INVESTIGATIVE EDITORIAL

The 592 Guardian is committed to public interest journalism. Corrections or official responses from the Ministry of Health are welcomed and will be published in full.

𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐒𝐇𝐀𝐃𝐎𝐖 𝐒𝐄𝐂𝐑𝐄𝐓𝐀𝐑𝐈𝐀𝐓: 𝐇𝐎𝐖 𝐆𝐔𝐘𝐀𝐍𝐀’𝐒 𝐌𝐈𝐍𝐈𝐒𝐓𝐑𝐘 𝐎𝐅 𝐍𝐀𝐓𝐔𝐑𝐀𝐋 𝐑𝐄𝐒𝐎𝐔𝐑𝐂𝐄𝐒 𝐌𝐀𝐘 𝐁𝐄 𝐄𝐍𝐆𝐈𝐍𝐄𝐄𝐑𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐀 𝐂𝐎𝐌𝐏𝐋𝐈𝐀𝐍𝐂𝐄 𝐈𝐋𝐋𝐔𝐒𝐈𝐎𝐍 𝐀𝐇𝐄𝐀𝐃 𝐎𝐅 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐉𝐔𝐍𝐄 𝟐𝟎𝟐𝟔 𝐄𝐈𝐓𝐈 𝐕𝐀𝐋𝐈𝐃𝐀𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍

BY: Hem Kumar 

𝙏𝙝𝙚 592 𝙂𝙪𝙖𝙧𝙙𝙞𝙖𝙣

𝗪𝗛𝗔𝗧 𝗛𝗔𝗦 𝗛𝗔𝗣𝗣𝗘𝗡𝗘𝗗 — 𝗔𝗡𝗗 𝗪𝗛𝗬 𝗜𝗧 𝗠𝗔𝗧𝗧𝗘𝗥𝗦

𝙎𝙪𝙗𝙟𝙚𝙘𝙩: 𝘿𝙧. 𝙋𝙧𝙚𝙢 𝙈𝙞𝙨𝙞𝙧 | 𝙍𝙤𝙡𝙚: 𝘼𝙙𝙫𝙞𝙨𝙤𝙧, 𝙂𝙤𝙫𝙚𝙧𝙣𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩 𝘼𝙜𝙚𝙣𝙘𝙮 𝙀𝙣𝙜𝙖𝙜𝙚𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩 | 𝙈𝙞𝙣𝙞𝙨𝙩𝙧𝙮 𝙤𝙛 𝙉𝙖𝙩𝙪𝙧𝙖𝙡 𝙍𝙚𝙨𝙤𝙪𝙧𝙘𝙚𝙨, 𝙂𝙪𝙮𝙖𝙣𝙖

𝙆𝙚𝙮 𝘿𝙚𝙖𝙙𝙡𝙞𝙣𝙚: 𝙅𝙪𝙣𝙚 2026 𝙀𝙄𝙏𝙄 𝙑𝙖𝙡𝙞𝙙𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣 𝘿𝙚𝙘𝙞𝙨𝙞𝙤𝙣

𝗔𝗻 𝗮𝗰𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗲𝗱𝗶𝘁𝗼𝗿𝗶𝗮𝗹 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗰𝗶𝘃𝗶𝗹 𝘀𝗼𝗰𝗶𝗲𝘁𝘆, 𝗹𝗲𝗴𝗮𝗹 𝗽𝗮𝗿𝘁𝗻𝗲𝗿𝘀, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗮𝘂𝗱𝗶𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘀

𝗦𝗨𝗠𝗠𝗔𝗥𝗬: 𝗪𝗛𝗔𝗧 𝗛𝗔𝗦 𝗛𝗔𝗣𝗣𝗘𝗡𝗘𝗗 — 𝗔𝗡𝗗 𝗪𝗛𝗬 𝗜𝗧 𝗠𝗔𝗧𝗧𝗘𝗥𝗦

The appointment of Dr. Prem Misir to the role of  “𝗔𝗱𝘃𝗶𝘀𝗼𝗿, 𝗚𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗔𝗴𝗲𝗻𝗰𝘆 𝗘𝗻𝗴𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁” at the Ministry of Natural Resources is not, as it has been presented, an administrative upgrade. It is a strategic repackaging — one that serves two simultaneous purposes: it gives the international EITI Board the optical illusion of reform (a new title, a fresh mandate) while preserving operational control exactly where it has always resided — inside the Ministry.

In investigative terms, what we are looking at is a 𝗦𝗵𝗮𝗱𝗼𝘄 𝗦𝗲𝗰𝗿𝗲𝘁𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗮𝘁:  a parallel administrative track installed above the official GYEITI Secretariat, designed to filter, manage, and where necessary, neutralize inconvenient data before it reaches independent auditors.

The timing is not coincidental. Guyana was referred to the EITI Validation Committee on March 19th. A second “Low” or “No Progress” rating in June 2026 risks triggering full suspension from the EITI. This appointment is the government’s firewall — designed to ensure the 2024 and 2025 data sets do not expose the same structural gaps that caused the 2023 suspension.

𝗪𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗰𝗮𝗻𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗳𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘀, 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗼𝗻 𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗮𝗴𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗺. 𝗢𝗿 𝗮𝘁 𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗺𝘂𝗺, 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗶𝗿 𝘁𝗶𝘁𝗹𝗲.

𝗦𝗘𝗖𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡 𝗜: 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗠𝗘𝗖𝗛𝗔𝗡𝗜𝗖𝗦 — 𝗧𝗛𝗥𝗘𝗘 𝗪𝗔𝗬𝗦 𝗧𝗛𝗜𝗦 “𝗥𝗘𝗕𝗥𝗔𝗡𝗗” 𝗕𝗬𝗣𝗔𝗦𝗦𝗘𝗦 𝗧𝗥𝗔𝗡𝗦𝗣𝗔𝗥𝗘𝗡𝗖𝗬

1.𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗔𝗴𝗲𝗻𝗰𝘆 𝗙𝗶𝗿𝗲𝘄𝗮𝗹𝗹

Traditionally, the GYEITI Secretariat goes directly to the Guyana Gold Board, the Guyana Geology and Mines Commission (GGMC), and the Guyana Revenue Authority (GRA) for raw data. Under the guise of “coordination,” state agencies may now have been instructed — formally or informally — to route all GYEITI-related data through the Advisor first.

This creates a pre-screening layer. Discrepancies, unreconciled figures, and gaps in reporting can be “smoothed out” before they ever reach the Independent Administrator. By the time the auditors see the numbers, the numbers have already been managed.

2. 𝗩𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗦𝗰𝗿𝗶𝗽𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴

With the June 2026 Validation looming, the EITI Board will conduct stakeholder interviews. A core function of the Advisor role is almost certainly the coaching of newer, more compliant civil society members — those who replaced the sidelined independent voices — on the “correct” narrative to present to international investigators.

This is not governance. This is choreography.

3. 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗮𝗹 𝗜𝗺𝗺𝘂𝗻𝗶𝘁𝘆

By holding the title of “Advisor” rather than “National Coordinator,” Dr. Misir is no longer technically an officer of the GYEITI Secretariat. This insulation is deliberate. If the 2026 EITI Report contains errors, omissions, or unreconciled data, the Ministry can blame “administrative fragmentation” or Secretariat staff — while the Advisor, as a protected contractual entity, remains untouchable.

𝗔𝗰𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗵𝗮𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗯𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗴𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗻𝗲𝗱. 𝗜𝘁 𝗵𝗮𝘀 𝗯𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝗮𝗿𝗰𝗵𝗶𝘁𝗲𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗲𝗱.

𝗦𝗘𝗖𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡 𝗜𝗜: 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗟𝗘𝗚𝗔𝗟 𝗘𝗫𝗣𝗢𝗦𝗨𝗥𝗘 — 𝗪𝗛𝗔𝗧 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗦𝗧𝗔𝗞𝗘𝗛𝗢𝗟𝗗𝗘𝗥𝗦 𝗦𝗛𝗢𝗨𝗟𝗗 𝗧𝗔𝗥𝗚𝗘𝗧

The following represent potential breaches of the 2023 EITI Standard and Guyana’s domestic administrative law framework:𝗘𝗜𝗧𝗜 𝗥𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗶𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝟭.𝟰 — 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗠𝗦𝗚’𝘀 𝗥𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗢𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗲𝗲 𝗜𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻

The EITI Standard mandates that the Multi-Stakeholder Group (MSG) must oversee the implementation of the EITI process. The central legal question is this: Was the “Advisor, Government Agency Engagement” position created unilaterally by the Ministry, without the MSG reviewing or approving its Terms of Reference?

If the answer is yes — and all available indicators suggest it is — this constitutes a direct breach of the multi-stakeholder oversight mandate. It is not a procedural technicality. It is a structural violation.

𝗘𝗜𝗧𝗜 𝗥𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗶𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝟭.𝟭 — 𝗔𝗰𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝗚𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗟𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗽

The EITI Standard requires the government to appoint a senior individual who is legally accountable for the accuracy of data submitted to the International Board. If the Minister holds nominal leadership and Misir operates as the operational Advisor, a critical gap opens: who is legally responsible when the data is wrong?

This ambiguity is not accidental. It is the point.

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗨𝗹𝘁𝗿𝗮 𝗩𝗶𝗿𝗲𝘀 𝗤𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻

Legal inquiries should focus specifically on whether the Minister exceeded his statutory authority by creating a role that functionally overlaps with — and potentially subordinates — the statutory duties of the GYEITI National Secretariat. If the Secretariat is a body established by law or regulation, and the Advisor role effectively supersedes its data-collection mandate, the Minister may have acted ultra vires — beyond his lawful powers.

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗔𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝗜𝗻𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗔𝗰𝘁 (𝟮𝟬𝟭𝟭) 𝘃𝘀. 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗮𝗹 𝗦𝗲𝗰𝗿𝗲𝗰𝘆

Since the Commissioner of Information has remained non-responsive, the Advisor’s contract almost certainly operates as a private services agreement — shielded from standard civil service disclosure requirements.

The key distinction that must be established: Is Dr. Misir, a Public Officer subject to Guyana’s Integrity Commission Act, or a Contractual Consultant operating outside those accountability structures? The answer determines whether his contract, scope of work, and remuneration are subject to public disclosure — or deliberately hidden behind a procurement veil.

𝗦𝗘𝗖𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡 𝗜𝗜𝗜: 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗔𝗨𝗗𝗜𝗧 𝗧𝗥𝗔𝗜𝗟 — 𝗪𝗛𝗔𝗧 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗙𝗢𝗥𝗘𝗡𝗦𝗜𝗖 𝗔𝗨𝗗𝗜𝗧𝗢𝗥 𝗠𝗨𝗦𝗧 𝗧𝗥𝗔𝗖𝗘

The auditor’s task is to reconstruct the.𝗗𝗮𝘁𝗮 𝗖𝗵𝗮𝗶𝗻 𝗼𝗳 𝗖𝘂𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗱𝘆  

Four specific lines of inquiry should be pursued simultaneously:

1. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗧𝗲𝗿𝗺𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝗥𝗲𝗳𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗚𝗮𝗽

Obtain the formal Scope of Work for the Advisor position. Examine it for language that grants authority to “review,” “vet,” “approve,” or “coordinate” data from GGMC, GRA, or the Guyana Gold Board. Any such language confirms the existence of a pre-screening layer that compromises the integrity of the audit trail.

2. 𝗕𝘂𝗱𝗴𝗲𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘆 𝗢𝗿𝗶𝗴𝗶𝗻

Determine whether the Advisor’s remuneration is drawn from the GYEITI Secretariat’s allocated budget or from the Ministry of Natural Resources’ “Contracted Services” line. If the latter: he is a political agent funded through a discretionary ministerial budget, not a technical officer of the transparency body.

3.𝗜𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗠𝗲𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗮 𝘁𝗼 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗔𝗴𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗶𝗲𝘀

Has any Internal Memorandum been issued to GGMC, GGB, or GRA instructing those agencies to copy or route GYEITI-related data transfers through the Advisor? Such a document, if it exists, is the single most damaging piece of evidence — it proves the firewall is operational, not theoretical.

4. 𝗢𝗯𝘀𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗲𝗿 𝗜𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗳𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗜𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗽𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗔𝗱𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿

IDoes the Advisor attend meetings between the Independent Administrator (the international auditors) and state agencies? His presence in those sessions — even as a passive “observer” — constitutes government overreach into what is legally required to be an independent reconciliation process. It is sufficient grounds to challenge the validity of any GYEITI Report produced under these conditions.

𝗦𝗘𝗖𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡 𝗜𝗩: 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗛𝗔𝗥𝗗 𝗤𝗨𝗘𝗦𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡𝗦 — 𝗙𝗢𝗥 𝗖𝗜𝗩𝗜𝗟 𝗦𝗢𝗖𝗜𝗘𝗧𝗬 𝗦𝗢𝗨𝗥𝗖𝗘𝗦 𝗢𝗡 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗚𝗥𝗢𝗨𝗡𝗗

When you approach the independent MSG members who have been sidelined, ask them directly:

Q1:𝗪𝗵𝗼 𝗶𝘀 𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗶𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗠𝗦𝗚 𝘀𝘂𝗯-𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗲 𝗺𝗲𝗲𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴𝘀?

Is it Secretariat staff, as it should be — or is the Advisor leading those sessions? If the latter, the MSG’s operational independence has been effectively captured.

Q2: 𝗛𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝘀𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝘁’𝘀 𝗦𝗰𝗼𝗽𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗪𝗼𝗿𝗸?

If the Ministry refused to table the Terms of Reference at an MSG meeting, they have likely already violated EITI Requirement 1.4. The refusal itself is evidence.

Q3: 𝗜𝘀 𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗶𝗻 𝘀𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗜𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗽𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗔𝗱𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿?

His attendance in auditor meetings is not a neutral administrative courtesy. It is observable interference with the independence of the reconciliation process — and it should be formally documented and reported to the EITI International Secretariat.

Q4:𝗗𝗼 𝗚𝗬𝗘𝗜𝗧𝗜 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗳𝗳 𝗻𝗼𝘄 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗵𝗶𝗺 𝗶𝗻 𝗮𝗻𝘆 𝗰𝗮𝗽𝗮𝗰𝗶𝘁𝘆?

Even an informal “dotted line” reporting structure — where Secretariat staff feel obligated to keep the Advisor informed before acting — functionally subordinates the technical body to a political appointee. Ask Secretariat staff directly, and off the record.

Q5:𝗪𝗮𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗮 𝗖𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗻𝗲𝘁-𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗱 𝗽𝗼𝘀𝘁?

If so, why was it not publicized through the Department of Public Information in the standard transparent manner? A Cabinet-approved position that bypasses public announcement raises immediate questions about what the government did not want publicly scrutinized.

𝗦𝗘𝗖𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡 𝗩: 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗕𝗢𝗧𝗧𝗢𝗠 𝗟𝗜𝗡𝗘 — 𝗪𝗛𝗔𝗧 𝗧𝗛𝗜𝗦 𝗔𝗟𝗟 𝗠𝗘𝗔𝗡𝗦

The Ministry of Natural Resources is attempting to satisfy the June 2026 Validation Committee by presenting the appearance of strengthened government engagement. The international optics are: new title, new energy, renewed commitment.

The operational reality is the opposite. A political gatekeeper has been installed to manage the narrative flowing into the EITI process — to ensure that unreconciled figures, unexplained discrepancies, and data gaps do not survive into the final report in the form that would trigger a second suspension.

The legal hook that could unravel this entire arrangement is EITI Requirement 1.4. If it can be demonstrated that this role was created without MSG knowledge, without MSG review of its Terms of Reference, and without MSG consent — then the government has not strengthened its EITI compliance. It has violated it. And the June 2026 Validation outcome should reflect that violation accordingly.

The question is no longer whether something is wrong with how GYEITI is being managed. The question is whether the evidence trail is strong enough to prove it to an international body before the window closes.

𝗧𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘄𝗶𝗻𝗱𝗼𝘄 𝗰𝗹𝗼𝘀𝗲𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝗝𝘂𝗻𝗲.

𝙏𝙝𝙚 592 𝙂𝙪𝙖𝙧𝙙𝙞𝙖𝙣-𝙏𝙧𝙪𝙩𝙝 , 𝘼𝙘𝙘𝙤𝙪𝙣𝙩𝙖𝙗𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙮,𝙄𝙣𝙩𝙚𝙜𝙧𝙞𝙩𝙮 𝙄𝙣𝙂𝙪𝙮𝙖𝙣𝙖 𝘼𝙣𝙙 𝘾𝙖𝙧𝙞𝙗𝙗𝙚𝙖𝙣 𝙋𝙚𝙧𝙨𝙥𝙚𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙫𝙚𝙨.— ✦—

The Wales Watchdog Series: Part 111

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗗𝗼𝘂𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝗔𝗴𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀: 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗟𝗲𝗴𝗮𝗹 𝗔𝗿𝗰𝗵𝗶𝘁𝗲𝗰𝘁𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 $𝟭𝟬𝟮𝗠 “𝗣𝗼𝗶𝘀𝗼𝗻 𝗣𝗶𝗹𝗹”

𝗕𝗬: 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝟱𝟵𝟮 𝗚𝗨𝗔𝗥𝗗𝗜𝗔𝗡 𝗜𝗡𝗩𝗘𝗦𝗧𝗜𝗚𝗔𝗧𝗜𝗩𝗘 𝗨𝗡𝗜𝗧
𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗚𝗔𝗧𝗘𝗞𝗘𝗘𝗣𝗘𝗥𝗦 𝗢𝗙 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗧𝗥𝗘𝗔𝗦𝗨𝗥𝗬
If Part I exposed the contractor’s checkered past and Part II mapped the offshore shell games, Part III uncovers the most disturbing layer of the Gas-to-Energy (GtE) project:
The Inside Job. A project of this magnitude requires robust legal defense to protect the national interest. Instead, The 592 Guardian has found that the lines between the “Defender of the State” and the “Counsel for the Contractor” were not just blurred—they were non-existent.
𝗧𝗛𝗘 “𝗗𝗢𝗨𝗕𝗟𝗘 𝗔𝗚𝗘𝗡𝗧” 𝗔𝗧𝗧𝗢𝗥𝗡𝗘𝗬: 𝗗𝗘𝗩𝗜𝗡𝗗𝗥𝗔 𝗞𝗜𝗦𝗦𝗢𝗢𝗡
At the center of this web sits Devindra Kissoon, the founding member of London House Chambers and the President of the American Chamber of Commerce (AMCHAM) Guyana. Our investigation into the UK “Paper Trail” and local High Court filings has confirmed a stunning conflict of interest that effectively “disarmed” the Government of Guyana (GoG) before negotiations even began.
𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗙𝗶𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴𝘀:
• 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗶𝘂𝗺’𝘀 𝗔𝗿𝗰𝗵𝗶𝘁𝗲𝗰𝘁: As early as 2021, Kissoon and his firm were retained by the CH4-Lindsayca network. London House Chambers publicly boasts of representing the consortium to “secure” the natural gas plant deal.
• 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗚𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁’𝘀 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘀𝘂𝗹𝘁𝗮𝗻𝘁: Simultaneously, Kissoon has served as a prominent retained counsel for the Minister of Natural Resources and the state-owned Guyana Power and Light (GPL)—the very entity that must buy the power Lindsayca produces.
• 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗨𝗞 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝗻𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻: Our forensic look at 𝗟𝗜𝗡𝗗𝗦𝗔𝗬𝗖𝗔 𝗗𝗘𝗩𝗘𝗟𝗢𝗣𝗠𝗘𝗡𝗧 𝗟𝗟𝗣 (𝗢𝗖𝟰𝟰𝟰𝟴𝟴𝟮)—the UK entity used to trigger the US$102M arbitration—shows it was registered on November 30, 2022. Kissoon, a UK-qualified barrister and “London House” principal, is alleged to have been instrumental in engineering this specific UK-based structure to “armor” the contractor against local Guyanese oversight.
𝗧𝗛𝗘 “𝗣𝗢𝗜𝗦𝗢𝗡 𝗣𝗜𝗟𝗟”: 𝗔 𝗥𝗜𝗚𝗚𝗘𝗗 𝗔𝗥𝗕𝗜𝗧𝗥𝗔𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡
The US$102.7 million loss wasn’t a failure of luck; it was a failure by design.
• 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗪𝗮𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗿: Sources indicate that during the formation of the contract, Winston Brassington (Head of the GtE Taskforce) specifically requested that the contractors grant a “waiver” to allow Kissoon to provide the legal opinion on the arbitration venue and dispute resolution clauses.
• 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗥𝗲𝘀𝘂𝗹𝘁:The GoG essentially allowed the contractor’s lawyer to help write the rules for how the contractor could sue the GoG.
When the contractor triggered the Dispute Adjudication Board (DAAB) using the UK-Guyana Treaty, the government found itself trapped in a legal framework it had paid its own “double agent” to build. The result? A US$102,679,839 bill that taxpayers are now paying in installments, while the legal minds behind the deal remain insulated by high-level political connections.
𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗔𝗠𝗖𝗛𝗔𝗠 𝗩𝗘𝗡𝗘𝗘𝗥
By utilizing his position as AMCHAM President, Kissoon helped present the consortium as a “Tier-One American Engineering” powerhouse.
This polished, US-backed veneer effectively blinded Guyanese evaluators to the reality:that the entity was a debt-heavy vehicle with a history of FBI raids (via the CH4/Bellosta network) and shell-company maneuvers.
“𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘶𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘈𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘧𝘭𝘢𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘥𝘰𝘰𝘳, 𝘢 𝘉𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘵𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘭𝘰𝘤𝘬 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘧𝘦, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘢 𝘭𝘰𝘤𝘢𝘭 𝘭𝘢𝘸𝘺𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘰 𝘩𝘰𝘭𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘬𝘦𝘺.”— 𝗜𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲 𝗦𝗼𝘂𝗿𝗰𝗲, 𝗠𝗶𝗻𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗿𝘆 𝗼𝗳 𝗟𝗲𝗴𝗮𝗹 𝗔𝗳𝗳𝗮𝗶𝗿𝘀
𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗚𝗨𝗔𝗥𝗗𝗜𝗔𝗡’𝗦 𝗩𝗘𝗥𝗗𝗜𝗖𝗧
The US$102M payout is the price of collusion. When the person advising the Ministry on how to protect the public purse is the same person advising the contractor on how to extract from it, the public loses every time. This was not a negotiation; it was a coordinated transfer of wealth.
This add-on to Part III serves as a “Financial Health Warning” for both local and diaspora investors. It unmasks the legal machinery that has turned a national project into a private enclave.
𝗔𝗗𝗗𝗘𝗡𝗗𝗨𝗠 𝗧𝗢 𝗣𝗔𝗥𝗧 𝗜𝗜𝗜: 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗞𝗜𝗦𝗦𝗢𝗢𝗡 𝗖𝗛𝗥𝗢𝗡𝗜𝗖𝗟𝗘𝗦
𝗧𝗵𝗲 “𝗠𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗞𝗲𝘆” 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗪𝗮𝗹𝗲𝘀 𝗠𝗼𝗻𝗼𝗽𝗼𝗹𝘆
While the public sees Devindra Kissoon as a prominent attorney and the face of AMCHAM Guyana, The 592 Guardian has identified him as the “Master Key” that unlocks the Guyanese Treasury for the Lindsayca-CH4 consortium. His positioning is not merely a series of coincidences; it is a strategic occupation of every seat at the negotiating table.
1.𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗖𝗹𝗶𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗣𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗳𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗼: 𝗔 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝗳𝗹𝗶𝗰𝘁 𝗼𝗳 𝗜𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗠𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗰𝗹𝗮𝘀𝘀 :To understand how the US$102.7M arbitration loss happened, one must look at the names on Kissoon’s ledger. He is simultaneously:
• 𝗖𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘀𝗲𝗹 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗼𝗿:
Representing the Lindsayca-CH4 consortium during the inception of the GtE project.
• 𝗖𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘀𝗲𝗹 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗩𝗶𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗿𝘆: Serving as the personal legal representative for Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo (the chief architect of the GtE project).
• 𝗖𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘀𝗲𝗹 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗕𝘂𝘆𝗲𝗿: Providing legal services to Guyana Power and Light (GPL)—the state entity forced to absorb the costs of the project’s delays.
• 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗚𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗸𝗲𝗲𝗽𝗲𝗿 𝗼𝗳 𝗜𝗻𝘃𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁:
Operating as President of AMCHAM, where he “vets” incoming US and diaspora firms, effectively deciding who gets to play in the Wales arena.
2.𝗧𝗵𝗲 “𝗣𝗿𝗲𝗳𝗲𝗿𝗿𝗲𝗱 𝗕𝗶𝗱𝗱𝗲𝗿” 𝗣𝗶𝗽𝗲𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗲: Our investigation has uncovered that the current Expressions of Interest (EOI) for the Fertilizer and Gas Bottling plants carry the same “DNA” as the original power plant deal.
• 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗦𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗴𝘆: By incorporating these new entities as Private Companies rather than Public Corporations, Kissoon’s legal framework ensures they are exempt from the Public Procurement Act.
• 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗜𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲 𝗧𝗿𝗮𝗰𝗸:This allows the government to bypass open competitive bidding and move directly to a “Preferred Bidder” status for Lindsayca—the same company currently holding the government hostage for an additional US$250M.
3.𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗗𝗶𝗮𝘀𝗽𝗼𝗿𝗮 𝗪𝗮𝗿𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴: 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝟭𝟬% 𝗚𝘂𝗮𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗲 𝗧𝗿𝗮𝗽: To the Guyanese Diaspora looking to “invest in home,” beware of the fine print. The EOI documents—reportedly structured under Kissoon’s guidance—feature a 10% Guaranteed Annual Return.
• 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗧𝗿𝗮𝗽: This guarantee is not backed by the profits of the fertilizer plant (which doesn’t exist yet); it is backed by the Consolidated Fund.
• 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗥𝗲𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆: If the project fails or the contractor (Lindsayca) mismanages the funds—as they have in the Dominican Republic—the Guyanese taxpayer is legally obligated to pay the investors their 10%. You aren’t investing in a business; you are investing in a debt instrument that your own relatives in Guyana will have to pay back through taxes.
𝟰. 𝗥𝗲𝗴𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 “𝗦𝗵𝗶𝗲𝗹𝗱”
We have confirmed through UK Companies House records that the registration of LINDSAYCA DEVELOPMENT LLP was a surgical strike. By placing the entity in a jurisdiction with a favorable treaty, Kissoon provided the contractor with a “legal armor” that our local Attorney General’s chambers was either too incompetent or too complicit to challenge.
“𝘐𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘫𝘶𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘥𝘪𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘭𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘭 𝘰𝘧 𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘭𝘢𝘱 𝘸𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘨𝘦𝘳 𝘢 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘣𝘢𝘳𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘢 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘤 𝘢𝘶𝘥𝘪𝘵. 𝘐𝘯 𝘎𝘶𝘺𝘢𝘯𝘢, 𝘪𝘵 𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘯𝘴 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘢 𝘴𝘦𝘢𝘵 𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘩𝘦𝘢𝘥 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦.”—
𝗘𝗱𝗶𝘁𝗼𝗿𝗶𝗮𝗹 𝗕𝗼𝗮𝗿𝗱, 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝟱𝟵𝟮 𝗚𝘂𝗮𝗿𝗱𝗶𝗮𝗻
𝗖𝗢𝗠𝗜𝗡𝗚 𝗡𝗘𝗫𝗧 | 𝗣𝗔𝗥𝗧 𝗜𝗩: 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗘𝗢𝗜
𝗘𝗫𝗣𝗢𝗦𝗘𝗗; 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗠𝗮𝗻𝘇𝗮𝗻𝗶𝗹𝗹𝗼 𝗪𝗮𝗿𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴, 𝗧𝗵𝗲 “𝗕𝗹𝗮𝗰𝗸 𝗕𝗼𝘅” 𝗼𝗳 𝗪𝗮𝗹𝗲𝘀: How the US$340M Fertilizer and Gas Bottling Deals are Being Hidden from Public Scrutiny. We will break down the specific terms of the EOI and why the “Private Entity” status is a death knell for transparency.
𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗠𝗮𝗻𝘇𝗮𝗻𝗶𝗹𝗹𝗼 𝗪𝗮𝗿𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴—A side-by-side comparison of the failed DR project and the current Wales trajectory.
𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝟱𝟵𝟮 𝗚𝗨𝗔𝗥𝗗𝗜𝗔𝗡: 𝗛𝗮𝗿𝗱-𝗧𝗿𝘂𝘁𝗵. 𝗜𝗻𝘃𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗴𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗥𝗲𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁. 𝗬𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗥𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁𝘀, 𝗚𝘂𝗮𝗿𝗱𝗲𝗱.
𝙏𝙝𝙚 592 𝙂𝙪𝙖𝙧𝙙𝙞𝙖𝙣 — 𝙏𝙧𝙪𝙩𝙝 , 𝘼𝙘𝙘𝙤𝙪𝙣𝙩𝙖𝙗𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙮, 𝙄𝙣𝙩𝙚𝙜𝙧𝙞𝙩𝙮 𝙄𝙣 𝙂𝙪𝙮𝙖𝙣𝙖 𝘼𝙣𝙙 𝘾𝙖𝙧𝙞𝙗𝙗𝙚𝙖𝙣 𝙋𝙚𝙧𝙨𝙥𝙚𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙫𝙚𝙨.

The Wales Watchdog Series: Part 1

𝗜𝗡𝗧𝗥𝗢𝗗𝗨𝗖𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡 :
In the interest of transparency and national accountability, 𝙏𝙝𝙚 592 𝙂𝙪𝙖𝙧𝙙𝙞𝙖𝙣 is embarking on the grueling task of unraveling the labyrinthine conundrum that has become the Gas-to-Energy project. What was birthed as a singular, unilateral vision—a project declared the largest and most impactful in our nation’s history—was inexplicably brought to life without the safeguards of a formal feasibility study. Even more alarming is the apparent absence of rigorous due diligence regarding the contractor, Lindsayca, whose checkered international record was seemingly overlooked. As the price tag balloons and the timelines shift, we are committed to deconstructing this complex web of financial maneuvers and procedural bypasses, ensuring that every Guyanese citizen is clued into the reality of how their future is being managed. We invite you to join us on this investigative journey as we demand the clarity and oversight that our treasury, and our people, deserve.
𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗣𝗥𝗘𝗠𝗜𝗦𝗘: 𝗔 𝗣𝗥𝗢𝗠𝗜𝗦𝗘 𝗢𝗡 𝗣𝗜𝗘𝗥 𝟭
In December 2022, the Government of Guyana (GoG) stood on the precipice of history, signing a $759 million USD contract with the Lindsayca-CH4 consortium. The promise was simple, yet seductive: a 300-megawatt power plant and Natural Gas Liquids (NGL) facility that would slash electricity costs by 50% by 2024.
But as the 2024 deadline crumbled, and as we stand in 2026 with a project total ballooning toward $1.1 billion USD, The 592 Guardian has pulled back the curtain on the “investigative vacuum” that allowed this deal to proceed. Our findings suggest that Lindsayca was never the “energy powerhouse” advertised, but rather a master of the 𝗘𝗣𝗖 𝗠𝗶𝗱𝗱𝗹𝗲𝗺𝗮𝗻 𝗠𝗼𝗱𝗲𝗹—Pl operating on high debt, low transparency, and a history of litigation.
𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗩𝗘𝗡𝗘𝗭𝗨𝗘𝗟𝗔𝗡 𝗚𝗘𝗡𝗘𝗦𝗜𝗦 & 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗛𝗢𝗨𝗦𝗧𝗢𝗡 𝗛𝗨𝗦𝗧𝗟𝗘
Lindsayca was born in 1995 as a family-owned engineering firm in Venezuela. When the brothers Hector and Jesus Fuentes Guimare moved operations to Houston in 2003, they didn’t export a legacy of massive turbine construction; they exported a Rolodex.
𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗥𝗲𝗱 𝗙𝗹𝗮𝗴𝘀 𝗜𝗴𝗻𝗼𝗿𝗲𝗱:
• The Gazprom Precedent: Before landing in Guyana, Lindsayca was embroiled in a $43 million USD dispute in Texas with Russian giant Gazprom. The allegations? Over-invoicing and under-performance on a gas compression plant. The pattern of “billing for the unbuilt” was established long before they touched Guyanese soil.
• The Debt Ratio: Independent financial audits from the 2016–2019 period—available during the bidding process—showed a company with staggering debt levels. Yet, the GoG’s evaluation committee deemed them “technically and financially sound” over world-class bidders like Guycan (Daewoo/Mitsubishi).
𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗦𝗛𝗘𝗟𝗟 𝗚𝗔𝗠𝗘: 𝗧𝗛𝗘 “𝗥𝗗” 𝗖𝗢𝗡𝗡𝗘𝗖𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡
Our investigation has tracked a sophisticated “internal procurement” loop. Lindsayca Guyana Inc. has not been purchasing critical materials directly from manufacturers.
Instead, invoices obtained by The 592 Guardian show a circular flow of funds:
1. Guyanese Taxpayer Dollars are paid to Lindsayca Guyana.
2. Lindsayca Guyana “purchases” materials from Lindsayca RD SAS (a shell entity in the Dominican Republic).
3. Lindsayca RD SAS—owned by the same Fuentes brothers—buys the materials with a massive markup, effectively “round-tripping” the profit into offshore accounts before a single turbine is fired.
“This isn’t infrastructure; it’s an extraction mechanism. They are self-supplying at a premium, then crying ‘insolvency’ to demand more money from the Guyanese treasury.” — Investigative Source, GTE Taskforce
𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗣𝗥𝗜𝗖𝗘 𝗢𝗙 𝗦𝗜𝗟𝗘𝗡𝗖𝗘: $𝟭.𝟭 𝗕𝗜𝗟𝗟𝗜𝗢𝗡 𝗔𝗡𝗗 𝗖𝗢𝗨𝗡𝗧𝗜𝗡𝗚
Today, the “Deal of the Century” has become a “Debt of the Century.” The math is cold and unforgiving:
• Original Bid: $759 Million
• Arbitration Loss (DAAB): $102.7 Million (Paid by you, the taxpayer, due to site-access failures).
• The New Demand: $250 Million (The current “shakedown” amount Lindsayca claims is needed to reach late 2026).
𝗧𝗢𝗧𝗔𝗟 𝗖𝗢𝗦𝗧: $𝟭,𝟭𝟭𝟭,𝟳𝟬𝟬,𝟬𝟬𝟬 𝗨𝗦𝗗
𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗚𝗨𝗔𝗥𝗗𝗜𝗔𝗡’𝗦 𝗩𝗘𝗥𝗗𝗜𝗖𝗧
The lack of due diligence by the Government of Guyana was not an “oversight”—it was a systemic failure. By bypassing established giants with proven track records for a firm with “shaky” financials and a history of legal warfare, the state has placed our energy security in the hands of a contractor that thrives on delays.
As the private jets ferry executives between Houston, the DR, and Georgetown at a cost of $70,000 USD per week, the Guyanese citizen is left holding a utility bill that isn’t shrinking—it’s subsidizing a Venezuelan-owned shell game.
𝗘𝗗𝗜𝗧𝗢𝗥’𝗦 𝗡𝗢𝗧𝗘: 𝗧𝗛𝗘 “𝗨𝗞 𝗠𝗔𝗡𝗘𝗨𝗩𝗘𝗥” & 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗨𝗦$𝟭𝟬𝟮𝗠 𝗕𝗜𝗟𝗟
𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝟱𝟵𝟮 𝗚𝘂𝗮𝗿𝗱𝗶𝗮𝗻 has uncovered a deliberate legal sequence that effectively “armored” the Gas-to-Energy (GtE) contractors against Guyanese oversight.
While the public was told this was an American-led project, the legal reality was engineered in the UK. On November 30, 2022—just 14 days before the contract was signed in Georgetown—the consortium registered 𝗟𝗜𝗡𝗗𝗦𝗔𝗬𝗖𝗔𝗗𝗘𝗩𝗘𝗟𝗢𝗣𝗠𝗘𝗡𝗧 𝗟𝗟𝗣 (𝗢𝗖𝟰𝟰𝟰𝟴𝟴𝟮) in the United Kingdom. This was not a coincidence; it was a tactical deployment.
𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 “𝗣𝗮𝗽𝗲𝗿 𝗧𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗹”:
•𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝟭𝟵𝟴𝟵 𝗧𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘁𝘆 𝗧𝗿𝗮𝗽: By using a UK entity, the contractor successfully invoked the 1989 UK-Guyana Bilateral Investment Treaty. This allowed them to bypass our national courts and “drag” the government into international arbitration via the Dispute Adjudication/Avoidance Board (DAAB).
•𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗨𝗦$𝟭𝟬𝟮.𝟳 𝗠𝗶𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗣𝗮𝘆𝗼𝘂𝘁: As of January 2025, the DAAB ordered the Government of Guyana to pay the contractor a staggering US$102,679,839 for site handover delays and remediation. Despite government claims of “confidentiality,” records show these payments—equivalent to billions of Guyanese dollars—are already being siphoned from the Consolidated Fund in installments through 2026.
•𝗭𝗲𝗿𝗼 𝗟𝗼𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝗧𝗮𝘅 :Because the entity is a UK Limited Liability Partnership (LLP), it operates as a “tax-transparent” vehicle. Combined with the UK-Guyana Double Taxation Agreement, the contractor is shielded from local withholding taxes. While Guyanese citizens fund the project, the profits are repatriated to Houston and London virtually tax-free.
𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗕𝗼𝘁𝘁𝗼𝗺 𝗟𝗶𝗻𝗲: Our “putting people first” administration signed a contract that allowed a foreign entity to use a British flag as a legal shield. As a result, Guyanese taxpayers are now paying a US$100 million penalty to a company that, by design, contributes nothing back to our national treasury in taxes.
This concludes the first segment of our investigative series.
𝗦𝗧𝗔𝗬 𝗧𝗨𝗡𝗘𝗗 𝗙𝗢𝗥 𝗣𝗔𝗥𝗧 𝗜𝗜 : The Double Agents—The Legal Architects and the $102M Poison Pill.
𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝟱𝟵𝟮 𝗚𝗨𝗔𝗥𝗗𝗜𝗔𝗡: Hard-Truth. Investigative Report. Your Rights, Guarded.
𝙏𝙝𝙚 592 𝙂𝙪𝙖𝙧𝙙𝙞𝙖𝙣 — 𝙏𝙧𝙪𝙩𝙝 , 𝘼𝙘𝙘𝙤𝙪𝙣𝙩𝙖𝙗𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙮, 𝙄𝙣𝙩𝙚𝙜𝙧𝙞𝙩𝙮 𝙄𝙣 𝙂𝙪𝙮𝙖𝙣𝙖 𝘼𝙣𝙙 𝘾𝙖𝙧𝙞𝙗𝙗𝙚𝙖𝙣 𝙋𝙚𝙧𝙨𝙥𝙚𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙫𝙚𝙨

Wales Buses Expose Local Content Lie – Time to Burn It Down

A video hit FB this week: buses packed with Venezuelan migrants rolling up to Guyana’s Wales gas-to-energy site. Lindsayca ships them in while Guyanese watch from the fence. Local content? What a joke.
We’ve seen the Act enforced like scripture elsewhere. That $300M fuel farm? Dead over a shady consultant technicality. Multinationals rent 51% “Guyanese” certificates from insiders at premium rates. Elites cash in as landlords to foreign expats. Rules hit hard when big contracts are at stake.
But buses of migrants at a flagship project? Crickets. No tenders. No waivers shown. No “no local available” proof. Deadlines shift, excuses flow, and nationals compete with desperation labor. Double standard? It’s the whole damn game.
This isn’t oversight—it’s economic sabotage. Small man waits for skills training; migrants get bused in cheap. Insiders profit from ownership scams and rentals. When does enforcement touch the powerful, not just kill small deals?
Hard hits:
• Fuel farm axed for paperwork; Wales ignores buses. Why?
• Who waived Lindsayca? Names. Dates. Or admit the exemption scam.
• Locals sidelined in their country?
That’s not development—it’s colonization 2.0.
Government, Lindsayca: Answer or own the hypocrisy. Video’s viral. Truth’s out. Enforce equally or scrap the lie. Guyana First means ALL Guyanese, not rented certificates and migrant buses.
The 592 Guardian calls it: Local content’s a fraud for labor, a racket for the elite. Time to fix it—or watch trust burn.